Methodology for Asynchronous Motor Impedance Measurement by Using Higher Order Harmonics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The paper is written very poorly and is full of sentences that do not make any sense, along with grammatical and stylistic errors.

2. Several non-standard and confusing terms are used (e.g., "tactical frequency," "transformer bond" instead of inductive coupling, etc.). What is "active resistance"? What do you mean by "increased eddy currents in magnetic wire"?

3. The formatting style is changed in the middle of the Introduction.

4. Sentences ending with a question mark do not belong in a research article in an electrical engineering field (line 111, 116, 117, 126, 130, 254, 274).

5. The quality of the presented figures is very poor.

6. On lines 218 and 219, you suddenly mention PMSM, while so far, you have been dealing with an induction machine.

7. A website link does not belong inside the article (line 250, 251).

8. Results presented in the Conclusion are apparent and well known for several decades.

9. The reference style differs from the standard used by the journal. Furthermore, reference (ref. 6) is not cited in the text.

Overall, it is difficult to summarize the contributions of the article, as it is written for the reader very incomprehensibly. Furthermore, the achievements summed up in the Conclusion are not convincing and bring nothing new to the field. I recommend this paper to be rejected since, in my opinion, it does not meet the standards of the journal.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You for Your review. I and y coauthors have made a revision based o Your comments:

1. Confusing terms were replaced to right terms;
2. Formating style was fixed;
3. There are no more sencences with question mark;
4. Figures were iproved;
5. Confusing lines with PMSM was removed it was the error made in formating;
6. Website link was removed;
7. Conclusion section was expanded;
8. References were forated and now are all cited in text;

 

Please remember that I and my coauthor are not native English speakers, as a result, we will use MDPI English edditing services before publishing in journal.

Overall this research was executed because there lack of research pappers where influence of higher time harmonics are investigated. As today the most of the industrial motor applications are supplied from variable speed drives where influence of higher time harmonics is present and our research is actual for motor designing stage for reduction of the efficiency losses influenced by harmonics.

I hope that our revision will meet Your expectatiuons.

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a new methodology of motor‘s resistance measurement for mass production. A comparison to higher order harmonics values between the winding' resistance of benchmark and tested motor gives a faster and more accurately motors characteristics and losses induced by higher order harmonics. The dependency of inductance of motor winding from current of magnetic biasing and the frequency of harmonic voltage has been analyzed in this article.

The authors have to take into account the following observations:

1. First, the English language has to be checked for whole paper including the title (i.e. "higher time harmonics" has to be corrected with "higher order harmonics");
2. From lines 75 to 105, the text doesn't agree with the template format of the paper;
3. Figure 2 is very well known graph variation of magnetic induction and magnetic permeability vs. magnetic intensity field. So, this figure can be eliminated;
4. Both figures 3 and 4 should have a reduced size; they occupy almost the entire page;
5. At the end of Introduction section, the authors should insert the main goal of the paper, the novelty and the structure of the next sections;
6. The description of the beginning of section 2, lines 172 - 178, is difficult to understand; it would be better to have a graphic representation;
7. At figure 5, it is necessary to enter details about used electrical equipment: electrical motors, power supply, measurement equipment, etc.;
8. At Figure 6, it is necessary to introduce description of the simulation model, details about electric diagram; how have been obtained the values of resistance and capacitors?;
9. It is not necessary to insert in the manuscript the web-link of simulation model; however, the authors should provide the main results of the simulations with adequate explanations (for instance, the waveform at different frequencies, voltage magnitudes, or current values, etc.);
10. At Figures 11 and 12, it is not clear how phase angle and inductance is represented;
11. At the end of section 3, the lines 310-311, the following statement is not clear: "It can be seen, that relative power of windings voltage as frequency increases is obvious. Also as frequency increases, influence decline of magnetization is obvious." This has to be rewritten and to provide more details/explanations;
12. At Conclusions chapter, the authors should present the obtained results supported by experimental or simulated data; a comparison with the state-of-the-art will add value to the paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You for Your constructive review. As a result, I and my coauthors have made a revision of the article bassed on Your comments:

1. Formating of the papper was fixed.
2. The size of figures 3 and 4 was reduced.
3. The goal of the investigation was inserted in the end of introduction.
4. Figure 5 was detaled with numbers of the equipment and equipment was described in text.
5. Web link to simulation was removed.
6. Figure 10 and 11 titles were fixed.
7. Error in lines 310-311 was resolved.
8. Conclusions were expanded.

 

The title of the articles is correct because we are analysisng only higher time harmonics and higher spacial harmonics were not analysed.

Figure 2 is in the introduction part. Yes it is well known figure but we inserted it for review porpuses for readers that maybe are seen it first time. If You insist that this figure should be removed we will remove it.

The graphical explanation in section 2 could not be inserted as a vector diagram because the part of the vectors has to be represented in 2D and other part in 3D. As a result we can represent the Ilustration there motors' equivalent winding electromotive forces are compensating equal but they have different directions and compensates each other and sum of EMF is equal to 0. I attached the iliustration to my response to You if You decide that the iliustration is relevant for the article we will add it with the explenation.

The measurement results which were achieved in experiment coresponded to simulation results were phisical components were replaced with aplifiers, resistors, capacitors and etc. As a result, if it will be nesesary we will describe which parts of the model substitute the real experiment's parts.

Finally, I and my coauthors are not native English speakers and we will apply for MDPI English edditing services before publishing to the Journal

I hope that our revision will meet Your expectations.

 

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper deals with the approach to the impedanciometry of the asynchronous motor considering the higher time harmonics.

Altough the presented method is interesting, there are some doubts about the statements on the “magnetic permittivity factor of ferromagnetic magnetic wire...” cf. Fig. 2 with provided magnetic permeability of electrical steel. Are the wires on the motor core ferromagnetic?

Do the authors mean permeability or permittivity? 

How was the dependence in Fig. 2 obtained?

The Conclusion section should be rewritten to contain the bridge between the results and application not only the pure dependences of selected quantities.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You for Your constructive review on our article. I and my coauthors have made some corections regarding Your soliutions:

1. The meant permeability not permittivity and have removed the mistake in the manuscript.
2. The conclusion section was expanded.

I figure 2 we took the well known dependency graph and presented as in introduction we review why we done our research and we rely on known phenomenas.

I hope that our revision will inprove the manuscript that it will meet Your expectations.

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is much better now. But still I am missing any significant results. You are writing that we cant use IM equivalent parameters for higher hramonics. That is true I totaly agree. But from my point of view you are presenting too few results. I am missing more reasons why we should respect them in conlusion,  or some quantitative result like "we have measured that the losses will add 40W at 400Hz" or something like that. You are saying that empirical dependencies have to be applied.. Ok why don't you show some of them or try to support your measured results by some simulation or equation, your paper is lot of text about known issue and few about you methodology and contribution and results.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank You for Your review and comments we have improved our manuscript acording to them. The conclusions section was broadened and empirical equation for experimental results was added.

We hope that improved manuscript will meet Your expectations.

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas 

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a new methodology of motor‘s resistance measurement for mass production. A comparison to higher order harmonics values between the winding' resistance of benchmark and tested motor gives a faster and more accurately motors characteristics and losses induced by higher order harmonics. The dependency of inductance of motor winding from current of magnetic biasing and the frequency of harmonic voltage has been analyzed in this article.

The authors have to take into account the following observations:

1. First, the English language has to be checked for whole paper including the title (i.e. "higher time harmonics" has to be corrected with "higher order harmonics");
2. Figure 2 is very well known graph variation of magnetic induction and magnetic permeability vs. magnetic intensity field. So, this figure can be eliminated;
3. Figure 5 has a duplicate; it has to be removed;
4. Overall, this manuscript presents only an experimental method; there is no description of any mathematical model or some theoretical aspects related to the treated subject.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You for Your review and comments which helped us to improve the manuscript.

The title of the article was changed as You suggested also the higher time harmonics was changed to higher order harmonics in all text.

Figure 2 was removed

Figure 5 now figure 4 was duplicated because of trackchanges function in MS Word, please see in PDF version where is no duplication.

Overall this manuscript is mostly focused in experimental results and the concepts of losses in asinchronous motors because of the igher order harmonics. As a result we broadened the conclusions section and the dependency of impedance and current was written in equation with polimonomial equation.

We hope that our revision will improve the quality of the manuscript and the revision will meet Your expectations.

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas. 

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

OK

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank You for Your coments and suggestions, we have improved the quality of conclusions that they would corespond the results of the experiment.

I hope that our corections will meet Your expectations

Best regards,

Karolis Dambrauskas